Bad News For Hillary After What Trump’s Awesome New SCOTUS Pick Said About Her – About Time!

Bad News For Hillary After What Trump’s Awesome New SCOTUS Pick Said About Her – About Time!

As soon as Hillary Clinton reads this, then she might have less than a smile on her face as she realizes how much of a fan Trump’s new SCOTUS pick is NOT! This story comes out in the form of opposition research right after Trump announced his Supreme Court of the United States, Brett Kavanaugh, shortly after Trump’s announcement. This information dates back quite a while, all the way back to 2002 when it was read in a book, and then dating back even further to 1997 where it actually took place.

It was Kavanaugh who mouthed the word “b-tch” while he was watching then-President Bill Clinton’s State of the Union Address. The camera panned over to his wife Hillary and Kavanaugh MOUTHED the word. David Brock saw it and wrote about it in a book. This is what people are talking about and having a fit over. Liberals are acting like it’s a major crime for someone to call another person a name under their breath while that person is on television. It sounds like something that everyone in America has done at least once in their life when they see someone they don’t like so much. Every time liberals protest, they’re calling people names. Now they’re harassing people in public and getting violent. It’s a disaster on the left side of politics and they are melting down and flooding the waters with their liberal tears.

Kavanaugh’s mouthy word towards Clinton is no big deal, but here’s the specifics: “President Donald Trump’s Supreme Court nominee is reportedly no fan of Hillary Clinton, allegedly mouthing the word “bitch” as the camera panned to her during former President Bill Clinton’s State of the Union address in 1997.

The suggestion that federal appellate judge Brett Kavanaugh, 53, who Trump nominated Monday night, disliked Clinton at the time comes from a passage in a book by David Brock. “I saw one of Ken Starr’s deputies, Brett Kavanaugh, who was sitting across from me, mouth the word b***h when the camera panned to Hillary,” Brock wrote in his 2002 book Blinded by the Right, Law and Crime reported. “Judge Brett Kavanaugh is at or near top of SCOTUS list, per several people close to President Trump. But oppo research for possible hearings already moving fast. Sources pt’ing to David Brock’s book “Blinded by the Right.” Kav alleged to have mouthed an expletive re HRC. Pg. 306.,” he wrote in a tweet posted at the beginning of the month, prior to the president’s announcement.

At the time of the alleged incident, Kavanaugh worked for Ken Starr and would, along with the rest of Starr’s team, eventually work on the investigation into then-President Bill Clinton. A memo sent by Kavanaugh at the time, and shared by Vox, shows he pushed for tough questioning of the Democrat.

“After reflecting this evening, I am strongly opposed to giving the President any ‘break’… unless before his questioning on Monday, he either i) resigns or ii) confesses perjury and issues a public apology to you. I have tried hard to bend over backwards and to be fair to him.… In the end, I am convinced that there really are [no reasonable defenses]. The idea of going easy on him at the questioning is thus abhorrent to me,” the memo said.”

It’s one thing to call Hillary something to her face, which he did not, but for people to bring this up and act like it’s a problem is a huge disgrace to anyone who does oppositional research. If Kavanaugh slapped a woman in the face, then that would be news. If Kavanaugh calls Hillary Clinton a b-tch under his breath while she’s on TV, then no one cares and everyone laughs. Why? Because who cares?

It doesn’t matter what someone in politics says about someone else in politics no matter how offensive it may be. Let’s be honest, this isn’t even offensive. If you think this is offensive or unprofessional, then you must live in a bubble. People in the real world aren’t forced to like each other and sometimes they have something to say about each other under their breath.

If Kavanaugh thinks Hillary is a b-tch, then that’s his opinion.

Quite frankly, many people feel the same way about Hillary, so now there’s a thing you know.

President Trump Announced How He Just Got Mexico To Pay For The Wall

When President Trump said he would have Mexico pay for the wall on our southern border, he meant it. He just announced how they are going to do it too… through the USMCA (the revision of NAFTA). Which I suspect was the plan all along.

Very early this morning at about 4:38 am, Trump tweeted: “I often stated, “One way or the other, Mexico is going to pay for the Wall.” This has never changed. Our new deal with Mexico (and Canada), the USMCA, is so much better than the old, very costly & anti-USA NAFTA deal, that just by the money we save, MEXICO IS PAYING FOR THE WALL!”

Do you think Facebook should be regulated so they're forced to treat everyone the same, regardless of their political beliefs, considering their size and influence in society?

For those doubters on Twitter (and you will see some of them below), I highly doubt the plan was ever to have Mexico pay for the wall up front. We would fund the wall and recoup the funding from Mexico. I don’t see what is so hard to understand about that. But it seems to be a financial move many can’t seem to grasp and that is beyond their comprehension.

I fully support that if Congress just won’t fund the wall, having the military build it through Pentagon funding and then reimbursing them for it. Why? Because it is a national security issue and always has been. That border is a clear and present danger.

Why shouldn’t Trump have Mexico pay through the USMCA? And why all the negativity from people who are obviously poorly informed and just politically biased? They let their hate for the president dictate all their thoughts and actions rather than looking at the mechanics of the move and the benefits from it. I just don’t get these people. They have not even given this a chance and already they are shooting it down. That’s a leftist for you.

I often stated, “One way or the other, Mexico is going to pay for the Wall.” This has never changed. Our new deal with Mexico (and Canada), the USMCA, is so much better than the old, very costly & anti-USA NAFTA deal, that just by the money we save, MEXICO IS PAYING FOR THE WALL!

I am losing faith in you, sir. Why are you asking us taxpayers for 5 billion dollars if the new deal will pay for the wall? You promised that we wouldn’t have to pay for it! Please keep your promise, a free border wall, or I will not vote for you again. #NoWallNoVotepic.twitter.com/eDopbpl7T1

Also the deal still has to be ratified and approved by Congress which probably won't happen until the end of 2019 Or possibly mid 2020. So you're making promises using money you don't have and may possibly not get. What a shocker Mr. Bankruptcy

Great so you don't need a penny from Congress or US Taxpayers then. Let us know when Mexico sends you the check for the $5 billion you want for the first payment on the wall. Until then don't bother Americans for the $.

Most of these people don’t seem to get that a great deal of the funding for the wall was approved before Trump started all of this. I have never seen so many people so intent on leaving themselves open to attack. What a bunch of foolish, self-involved individuals. Just sad. Build the wall whatever it takes and do it fast before one of our many enemies gets a chance to severely cripple this nation once again.

Three Clinton Foundation Whistleblowers Will Testify This Coming Week, “Explosive” Allegations to Come…

“With regard to the investigation, which doesn’t get a lot of attention, into the Clinton foundation, the DOJ designated John Huber to look into this. They have 6,000 pages of evidence that they’ve gone through. The foundation raised $2.5 billion, and they’re looking into potential improprieties. What’s next on this investigation?” the Fox News host questioned Congressman Meadows.

“Well, I think for the American people, they want to bring some closure, not just a few sound bites, here or there, so we’re going to be having a hearing this week, not only covering over some of those 6,000 pages that you’re talking about, but hearing directly from three whistleblowers that have actually spent the majority of the last two years investigating this,” Meadows answered.

Some of the allegations they make are quite explosive, Martha and as we just look at the contributions — now everybody’s focused on the contributions for the Clinton Foundation and what has happened just in the last year, but if you look at it, you know, it had a very strong rise, the minute she was selected as Secretary of State — then it dipped down when she was no longer there and then rose again, when she decided to run for president. So there’s all kinds of allegations of you know, pay-to-play and that kind of thing, “Meadows said.

Take a look:

In the three years following Hillary Clinton’s departure from her position in the State Department, the Clinton Foundation donations dropped by 90%.

The Gateway Pundit writes, “Hillary Clinton left the State Department in 2013 and it looks like nobody wants to pay since she can no longer play.”

Currently, the Clinton Foundation is being put under investigation by the Justice Department and the FBI for a whole plethora of reasons.

The Hill reports that the Clinton Foundation is also being investigated by the IRS in order to find out whether or not any “tax-exempt assets were converted for personal or political use.”

Numerous Clinton emails backing up the idea that the Clinton Foundation was involved in “pay-to-play” schemes during Clinton’s time serving as the head of the Department of State have been found by Conservative watchdog group Judicial Watch.